Now that we are becoming more aware that we live in our own individual communication cul de sac’s we need to be looking at the reasons that have created this situation. Technology has streamlined communication and by it’s nature it is fundamentally binary. Biological communication is a messy subjective affair. Technological communication without the nuances of body language parses our inflection in computational representation, bits, that are subject to signal loss as well as being binary.
With biological or endosomatic evolution genetic diversity is built on mistakes in our genetic code. That error over time becomes an asset. With the rapidity of out technological or exosomatic evolution that asset of recombination creating diversity has been excluded. Exosomatic evolution prefers exclusion of error and prefers exactly reproducible results, sans nuance. This is the singularity.
Glass Display unit for an awkward corner.
“The economic function of public art is to increase the value of private property”
The Contemporary City attempts to fulfill both the means of interaction and the facilitation of services with the inhabitants and visitors of a city. Urban planning is the balance between the necessities of density, transport, recreational space, prestige and sometimes aesthetics. Marketing is the apparatus by which to open the city up to the influx of liquid capital in the forms of tourism and inward investment. For the most part the functions fulfilled by these two apparatus are determined in a top down approach meeting primarily the needs of the capital institutions of a city rather than its citizens.The Situationist International organisation (1957 – 1972) would have posited that the “Psychogeography” of a city is that of alienation, constraint and exploitation for capitalist means. Continue reading “The Contemporary City: Constructions and negotiations”
Prof. Matthew Causey – The Earth as a data farm for the virtual world
Heideggers theory of production of art
Duluze – Model of Assemblages
Heidegger Questions of Technology ?
What is and what matters – Functions of Art
Garret Phelan, artist/curator/all round messer came in to give a 3 day animation workshop. Throughout the first day the topics for the group project were debated, discussed, disparaged, diluted and deconstructed. Again, this gets back to artists, even such weanlings as ourselves, being as easy to get consensus as the eventual choice of topic proved to be. Repeal the 8th. a worthy topic for dissection certainly, but by the end of the first day we were 21 donkeys pulling in generally the same direction but not quite. It was never going to work as a single animation. So the tack that i took was to sit on a fence, or rather tried to sit on.
Charcoal animation a la William Kentridge is beautiful, but you can be damn sure that he knows at least where he is going with his imagery before he starts. I did not. And when i suggested to the coordinator that maybe we should storyboard I was told to just freestyle it. HA! Starting with a fairly innocuous pair of words “Yes” and “No” and trying to mash them together to show the messy nature of binary discourse which on the surface looks simple, proved otherwise. Speech bubbles become torso and head and the tail of the speech bubbles become arms and legs and then you end up with loaded imagery. Which is all well and good except for the fact you have spent 60 odd drawings and half a day to get there. In retrospect, the solution given to me by an accomplished animator Eimhin would have eased me out of that imaginary cul de sac; Spacecrabs. I should have turned that stinking little unintentional foetus into a Spacecrab.
I should have aborted the animation altogether and would have if I had that option.
What we have here is the result of carrying to term a fatal animated abnormality.
Moral of the story is to always, always, Storyboard.